I'd like to add to the discussion the specifics of the case that was brought to the Supreme Court: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBETD_SlpVU https://www.youtu

I'd like to add to the discussion the specifics of the case that was brought to the Supreme Court: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBETD_SlpVU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBETD_SlpVU This case has been 10 years in the making. In this case the EPA threatened to fine a family that wanted to develop a plot of land in a residential subdivision up to $75,000/day. The EPA claimed that because it had not yet fined the family, it's determination that their plot of land was a protected wetland under the Clean Water Act was not subject to judicial review. So the family would have a sword of Damocles hanging over their head if they decided to develop the land, but they couldn't challenge proactively that the land they wanted to develop was not in fact a protected wetland. The Supreme Court unanimously held that the compliance order threatening the fine was subject to judicial review, leading to the second case involving this plot of land, as to whether it was in fact a protected wetland.